You're near Glasgow? (Bozeman, myself. Well, Three Forks.) Nice shots of Andromeda... betcha most people don't realise it's visible. You could see it pretty clearly even down by Belgrade the area turned into Bozangeles.
That's roughly where it switches from irrigated farming (lowland watershed) to dryland farming and ranching (prairie), serious mountains, and desert, thus outside of the cities is much more thinly populated than the eastern half.
When I first moved out to the desert, nights there were DARK. And a moonless sky was lit up end to end -- you don't realise what an impressive swath the Milky Way makes if you haven't seen it like this. There's actually enough starlight to cast shadows. Visitors from the city would stand there gawking, having no idea it looked like that.
Civilization encroached, a gaggle of streetlamps went up a few miles away, and my wondrous night sky vanished into the ambient haze. And even tho the new lights were about 6 miles away, I no longer had to carry a flashlight when I needed to muck about outdoors after dark. It was that much brighter... enough to mask probably 80% of the visible stars.
It's not quite dead dark where I now live in the middle of nowhere, less because of the occasional rural yard light than because of a power station a few miles downriver that makes a signficant glow atop the intervening hills. But it's still a helluva lot better than what they did to my desert.
No, don't put it in light grey, cuz then it will be invisible to the rather large number of users who don't have bright white as their background. (Mine is medium grey, but I'm not all that odd.) At the very least, let us customize it.
No, and I speak from supporting a lot of elderly and non-tech-savvy people. What they think when they see a long string of unexpected symbols is "That might not be right. I better make *sure* this is my bank's website before I do anything else." Seriously, they are not near as dumb as stuff like this change tries to make them be. Cuz with such changes, they'll no longer have the choice to learn better.
And how long before the remaining displayed part of the name gets compromised, anyway?
Is it coincidence that about the time Google started using the fucking redirect links (which I perversely copy/paste out, because they annoy me so much, in fact I have the servername HOSTed out of existence) is also about when they stopped honoring "exact search" (quote-bracketed exact search term) ?? Funny how that's when garbage began to really take over search results, too. (Not just sponsored links, but all sorts of "content-site" trash.)
I wouldn't mind if they tracked my clicks on search to actually improve their algorithm. I might not mind too much if it led to quality targeting advertising (like the early days of AdWords). What I do mind is what with all the garbage links out there, my click-tracks may do the exact opposite of "improve the algorithm" -- especially if I can't see where I'm going until I actually click on it.
For some years I was the default support dude for a group of mostly-elderly people who were mostly not at all computer-savvy. And what I found is that they all learned to recognise when something didn't look right, including stuff like complex URLs. And they were real keen on "when in doubt, it's not right", and quick to pick up on the clues that something was awry. Even with complex URLs that make no sense to any sane person.
Stuff like this hidden URL crap makes it *impossible* for anyone to learn that sort of skill -- they're forced to trust the browser. And who's to say that won't be exploited too?
Dumbing down not only hurts folks who are savvy, it hurts those who are not, because it prevents them from ever learning better.
The price difference between manufacturing electronics in China vs in the U.S. is not that great. Friend of a friend is an exec high up in the iPad division, and about 3 years ago he mentioned to my friend (who told me) that the cost to make an iPad in China was $38, but they had figured out that it would only cost $5 more to make the same unit in the U.S. But Apple gladly took the extra $5 profit per unit, and was unconcerned about anything else.
Also, they won't let you sell more than 25% of your total output via Costco. I was told this by a local producer who has been somewhat frustrated by it, because it's tough for them to find sufficient retail exposure outside of Costco. Catch-22 in this case, but meant to prevent companies from becoming utterly dependent on Costco.
I have a set of the earliest retail VHS tapes, and there are still things messed up in the audio (some substituted, some entirely absent) -- same stuff as is borked in the 1978 theatrical revision. Having seen the first run over 30 times, I noticed.:/
Not sure what version is on laserdisk, having never owned that platform. Wonder if some kind soul out there has ripped it for the masses...
Your old tape probably has a very thick oxide layer on a fairly thick backing, compared to modern stuff.
Back when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, I got my VHS blank tapes from a guy who bought it straight from TDK -- at the time that was the only place I could find their best retail tape, which was about half again 'thicker' than standard consumer tape (and cost about half again as much, too). Per what he told me, this was basically the seconds from their studio-grade tape, and it was still miles above standard tape. When you're recording off a weak over-the-air signal, tape quality makes a huge difference.
At the far end of the scale, you couldn't give me Kodak tapes.
Good to know... is it a regular thing with the Photo Department? What do they charge, do you recall offhand? Chances are they didn't buy the cheapest gear around, either.
[You know you've spent too much at Costco when the manager sees you go by and pursues you waving the Executive Membership form... yep, he did. Really.]
My older Panasonic VHS (which I bought used in 1984, but it was about a year old then) is a two-head, and it does EP -- tho there's a considerable loss of quality. Not so noticeable on my newer Panasonic 4-head (got it about 1998, I forget exactly).
You still want to go with a 4-head if you can find it -- trust me, having seen playback side by side, it makes a BIG difference -- even on tapes recorded with the 2-head, and especially on tapes recorded in EP by the 2-head. No comparison. (I checked with that some old tapes I'd recorded off TV that I wanted to rip, but the DVDs came along before I got around to trying it.)
Any Panasonic new enough to not be in the bulky case is likely to be a 4-head anyway; they were fairly early to that party. Far as I've seen they all say which right on the case anyway.
I've heard nothing but good about the Hauppauge capture cards, tho I haven't got round to trying it myself (I picked one up for free as part of a junked computer). Good info on using 'em, thanks!
Panasonic made good quality players that are remarkably durable. I'd pick one up used with little fear that it wouldn't work. My older Panasonic VHS dates to 1983 and still works fine. And no, you can't have my newer Panasonic, which also still works. Also, they have NEVER eaten a tape, and the older one in particular worked its little analog ass off. (I've often joked that Panasonic consumer electronics are too dumb to know when they're dead, since they generally work forever.)
You want a four-head player, as the pickup quality is considerably better than a two-head. As someone mentions, S-Video output is a Good Thing too. My newer Panasonic has this, and it's at least 15 years old.
You also want to make sure no one ever used a "head cleaner" on it... those only had value in a smoking environment, as they'd scrape off the residue. They'd also scrape off the head surface. This is the real cause of VHS players "wearing out". Needless to say you don't want one that's been in a smoking environment in the first place -- it'll gum up your tapes.
With tapes that have been in storage a while, you should do a full wind and rewind (at low speed if you have the option) to make sure they're tensioned properly and not stuck together, before you do your ripping job.
The other thing with Panasonic is that they used a generic-sized belt that can be replaced. So if the belt has cracked from age, you can probably find a new one.
And chances are you can pick one up for free off Freecycle.
Someone mentioned a tape/DVD DVR gadget -- much easier, but from what I've heard the quality of the tape heads on such gadgets is not great, being they're not really dedicated VHS units. On the other hand you don't have the loss from the data being horsed back and forth across cables, so it might be a wash.
Please come back and tell us what worked out best...some of us also have boxes full of tapes we haven't got round to digitizing.:)
(Actually, it was easier to just buy the damn DVD when/if those came out. *sigh*)
Tho there's another side effect -- clogged sewage lines from house to street or septic tank, since they don't get enough water to prevent buildup. It's not so much the solids, as the microsludge that sticks to the pipe when there's not enough flowing water to dislodge it. Eventually it clogs up.
Flushing twice is cheaper than roto-rootering the outflow pipe.
And potholes do wonders for your mechanic's bank balance.
I challenge a SDC to make it down 10th Avenue South in Great Falls MT after a winter's freeze/thaw cycles have turned this main-drag (for both cars and trucks) into an obstacle course (which happens despite intensive maintenance). We used to not-quite-joke that there were VW Bugs swimming in the larger potholes.
And I think you just nailed why Google gives a shit: because a self-driving car that never takes a day off and doesn't demand benefits is WAY cheaper than a gaggle of employees driving those same miles. Since the object is to accumulate data to sell (to other SDC manufacturers in due course), why spend all the profits on employees if a robot can do the job cheaper in the long run?
How quickly can one switch to manual mode? For anything that's truly an emergency, you may have bare seconds to respond, or perhaps only a fraction of a second. Not enough time to flick a switch and move your hands and feet to the controls, but enough to react if you're already "in position".
And then there's the issue of dedicated streets that don't actually exist. A fun example in Los Angeles runs right through the middle of the big Water & Power facility.
And there's the ongoing example of "Tail of the Dragon" in Tennessee/North Carolina... a perfectly valid road, a U.S. Route no less, yet not suitable for a significant fraction of traffic sent via that 'shortcut' by their GPS.
It should be fairly easy to do, since the SDC won't have the ability to be 'rude' and push ahead or sneak into a narrow gap to get away from the crowder.
Having had to hit the ditch a few times to avoid a head-on, I appreciate the necessity of drivers being able to make judgment calls.
And I wonder how much this is a solution in search of a problem. A while back someone here piped up with the "accidents per mile driven" stats, and the risk factor was ridiculously low, considering how many millions of miles we drive in the U.S.
"...how easy should we make it for people to do that?"
I think that's the wrong question. It assumes that the =average= person *wants* to go forth and commit mayhem, AND has no social brake on his behavior.
Reality is that only rare individuals have such a desire (most of us have =fantasized= about doing away with some jackass) AND lack the social brake. The right question is -- is that microscopic incidence worth restricting everyone's ability to own whatever? (Isn't this the same nonsense that assumes every airline passenger is a terrorist?)
Chemistry being what it is, there's always an alternative. If you can't get diesel and fertilizer, there's always ammonia and propane, or even just propane by itself. Should we restrict millions' ability to heat their homes because some nutjob =might= use a propane tank as a bomb?
[And if you don't think that's doable, my propane dude told me of a case where a portable cylinder fell off a shelf, knocked its valve askew, and the resulting explosion flattened a motel. Yep, something the size of a Gatorade bottle took out a good-sized building. Having seen the aftermath of a neighbor's misadventure with propane, I'm not too astonished.]
Insider information is that an iPad costs $38 to make in China. Do you really believe an iPhone is that much more costly to make? So there's your cost-to-manufacture, probably no more than $50 even for high-end phones.
I'd say they're so willing to give that up for 2-year contracts because their beancounters say the contract is more profitable than taking the windfall profit from selling the phone outright.
Slashdot Mirror
You're near Glasgow? (Bozeman, myself. Well, Three Forks.) Nice shots of Andromeda... betcha most people don't realise it's visible. You could see it pretty clearly even down by Belgrade the area turned into Bozangeles.
That's roughly where it switches from irrigated farming (lowland watershed) to dryland farming and ranching (prairie), serious mountains, and desert, thus outside of the cities is much more thinly populated than the eastern half.
When I first moved out to the desert, nights there were DARK. And a moonless sky was lit up end to end -- you don't realise what an impressive swath the Milky Way makes if you haven't seen it like this. There's actually enough starlight to cast shadows. Visitors from the city would stand there gawking, having no idea it looked like that.
Civilization encroached, a gaggle of streetlamps went up a few miles away, and my wondrous night sky vanished into the ambient haze. And even tho the new lights were about 6 miles away, I no longer had to carry a flashlight when I needed to muck about outdoors after dark. It was that much brighter... enough to mask probably 80% of the visible stars.
It's not quite dead dark where I now live in the middle of nowhere, less because of the occasional rural yard light than because of a power station a few miles downriver that makes a signficant glow atop the intervening hills. But it's still a helluva lot better than what they did to my desert.
That would be a wee bit tough to replace, all right! Glad to hear the quality is good. I may use it sometime myself. Thanks!
Because the next logical step is to show only the page title.
No, don't put it in light grey, cuz then it will be invisible to the rather large number of users who don't have bright white as their background. (Mine is medium grey, but I'm not all that odd.) At the very least, let us customize it.
No, and I speak from supporting a lot of elderly and non-tech-savvy people. What they think when they see a long string of unexpected symbols is "That might not be right. I better make *sure* this is my bank's website before I do anything else." Seriously, they are not near as dumb as stuff like this change tries to make them be. Cuz with such changes, they'll no longer have the choice to learn better.
And how long before the remaining displayed part of the name gets compromised, anyway?
Is it coincidence that about the time Google started using the fucking redirect links (which I perversely copy/paste out, because they annoy me so much, in fact I have the servername HOSTed out of existence) is also about when they stopped honoring "exact search" (quote-bracketed exact search term) ?? Funny how that's when garbage began to really take over search results, too. (Not just sponsored links, but all sorts of "content-site" trash.)
I wouldn't mind if they tracked my clicks on search to actually improve their algorithm. I might not mind too much if it led to quality targeting advertising (like the early days of AdWords). What I do mind is what with all the garbage links out there, my click-tracks may do the exact opposite of "improve the algorithm" -- especially if I can't see where I'm going until I actually click on it.
For some years I was the default support dude for a group of mostly-elderly people who were mostly not at all computer-savvy. And what I found is that they all learned to recognise when something didn't look right, including stuff like complex URLs. And they were real keen on "when in doubt, it's not right", and quick to pick up on the clues that something was awry. Even with complex URLs that make no sense to any sane person.
Stuff like this hidden URL crap makes it *impossible* for anyone to learn that sort of skill -- they're forced to trust the browser. And who's to say that won't be exploited too?
Dumbing down not only hurts folks who are savvy, it hurts those who are not, because it prevents them from ever learning better.
I use Clipomatic, but Ditto looks like a nice option too, and I see it comes in a Portable version. Thanks!
The price difference between manufacturing electronics in China vs in the U.S. is not that great. Friend of a friend is an exec high up in the iPad division, and about 3 years ago he mentioned to my friend (who told me) that the cost to make an iPad in China was $38, but they had figured out that it would only cost $5 more to make the same unit in the U.S. But Apple gladly took the extra $5 profit per unit, and was unconcerned about anything else.
Also, they won't let you sell more than 25% of your total output via Costco. I was told this by a local producer who has been somewhat frustrated by it, because it's tough for them to find sufficient retail exposure outside of Costco. Catch-22 in this case, but meant to prevent companies from becoming utterly dependent on Costco.
I have a set of the earliest retail VHS tapes, and there are still things messed up in the audio (some substituted, some entirely absent) -- same stuff as is borked in the 1978 theatrical revision. Having seen the first run over 30 times, I noticed. :/
Not sure what version is on laserdisk, having never owned that platform. Wonder if some kind soul out there has ripped it for the masses...
Your old tape probably has a very thick oxide layer on a fairly thick backing, compared to modern stuff.
Back when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, I got my VHS blank tapes from a guy who bought it straight from TDK -- at the time that was the only place I could find their best retail tape, which was about half again 'thicker' than standard consumer tape (and cost about half again as much, too). Per what he told me, this was basically the seconds from their studio-grade tape, and it was still miles above standard tape. When you're recording off a weak over-the-air signal, tape quality makes a huge difference.
At the far end of the scale, you couldn't give me Kodak tapes.
Good to know... is it a regular thing with the Photo Department? What do they charge, do you recall offhand? Chances are they didn't buy the cheapest gear around, either.
[You know you've spent too much at Costco when the manager sees you go by and pursues you waving the Executive Membership form... yep, he did. Really.]
My older Panasonic VHS (which I bought used in 1984, but it was about a year old then) is a two-head, and it does EP -- tho there's a considerable loss of quality. Not so noticeable on my newer Panasonic 4-head (got it about 1998, I forget exactly).
You still want to go with a 4-head if you can find it -- trust me, having seen playback side by side, it makes a BIG difference -- even on tapes recorded with the 2-head, and especially on tapes recorded in EP by the 2-head. No comparison. (I checked with that some old tapes I'd recorded off TV that I wanted to rip, but the DVDs came along before I got around to trying it.)
Any Panasonic new enough to not be in the bulky case is likely to be a 4-head anyway; they were fairly early to that party. Far as I've seen they all say which right on the case anyway.
I've heard nothing but good about the Hauppauge capture cards, tho I haven't got round to trying it myself (I picked one up for free as part of a junked computer). Good info on using 'em, thanks!
Panasonic made good quality players that are remarkably durable. I'd pick one up used with little fear that it wouldn't work. My older Panasonic VHS dates to 1983 and still works fine. And no, you can't have my newer Panasonic, which also still works. Also, they have NEVER eaten a tape, and the older one in particular worked its little analog ass off. (I've often joked that Panasonic consumer electronics are too dumb to know when they're dead, since they generally work forever.)
You want a four-head player, as the pickup quality is considerably better than a two-head. As someone mentions, S-Video output is a Good Thing too. My newer Panasonic has this, and it's at least 15 years old.
You also want to make sure no one ever used a "head cleaner" on it... those only had value in a smoking environment, as they'd scrape off the residue. They'd also scrape off the head surface. This is the real cause of VHS players "wearing out". Needless to say you don't want one that's been in a smoking environment in the first place -- it'll gum up your tapes.
With tapes that have been in storage a while, you should do a full wind and rewind (at low speed if you have the option) to make sure they're tensioned properly and not stuck together, before you do your ripping job.
The other thing with Panasonic is that they used a generic-sized belt that can be replaced. So if the belt has cracked from age, you can probably find a new one.
And chances are you can pick one up for free off Freecycle.
Someone mentioned a tape/DVD DVR gadget -- much easier, but from what I've heard the quality of the tape heads on such gadgets is not great, being they're not really dedicated VHS units. On the other hand you don't have the loss from the data being horsed back and forth across cables, so it might be a wash.
Please come back and tell us what worked out best...some of us also have boxes full of tapes we haven't got round to digitizing. :)
(Actually, it was easier to just buy the damn DVD when/if those came out. *sigh*)
Tho there's another side effect -- clogged sewage lines from house to street or septic tank, since they don't get enough water to prevent buildup. It's not so much the solids, as the microsludge that sticks to the pipe when there's not enough flowing water to dislodge it. Eventually it clogs up.
Flushing twice is cheaper than roto-rootering the outflow pipe.
And potholes do wonders for your mechanic's bank balance.
I challenge a SDC to make it down 10th Avenue South in Great Falls MT after a winter's freeze/thaw cycles have turned this main-drag (for both cars and trucks) into an obstacle course (which happens despite intensive maintenance). We used to not-quite-joke that there were VW Bugs swimming in the larger potholes.
And I think you just nailed why Google gives a shit: because a self-driving car that never takes a day off and doesn't demand benefits is WAY cheaper than a gaggle of employees driving those same miles. Since the object is to accumulate data to sell (to other SDC manufacturers in due course), why spend all the profits on employees if a robot can do the job cheaper in the long run?
How quickly can one switch to manual mode? For anything that's truly an emergency, you may have bare seconds to respond, or perhaps only a fraction of a second. Not enough time to flick a switch and move your hands and feet to the controls, but enough to react if you're already "in position".
And then there's the issue of dedicated streets that don't actually exist. A fun example in Los Angeles runs right through the middle of the big Water & Power facility.
And there's the ongoing example of "Tail of the Dragon" in Tennessee/North Carolina... a perfectly valid road, a U.S. Route no less, yet not suitable for a significant fraction of traffic sent via that 'shortcut' by their GPS.
http://tailofthedragon.com/dra...
And how to have 'fun' with self-driving cars:
Crowd 'em.
Right into the ditch.
It should be fairly easy to do, since the SDC won't have the ability to be 'rude' and push ahead or sneak into a narrow gap to get away from the crowder.
Having had to hit the ditch a few times to avoid a head-on, I appreciate the necessity of drivers being able to make judgment calls.
And I wonder how much this is a solution in search of a problem. A while back someone here piped up with the "accidents per mile driven" stats, and the risk factor was ridiculously low, considering how many millions of miles we drive in the U.S.
"...how easy should we make it for people to do that?"
I think that's the wrong question. It assumes that the =average= person *wants* to go forth and commit mayhem, AND has no social brake on his behavior.
Reality is that only rare individuals have such a desire (most of us have =fantasized= about doing away with some jackass) AND lack the social brake. The right question is -- is that microscopic incidence worth restricting everyone's ability to own whatever? (Isn't this the same nonsense that assumes every airline passenger is a terrorist?)
Chemistry being what it is, there's always an alternative. If you can't get diesel and fertilizer, there's always ammonia and propane, or even just propane by itself. Should we restrict millions' ability to heat their homes because some nutjob =might= use a propane tank as a bomb?
[And if you don't think that's doable, my propane dude told me of a case where a portable cylinder fell off a shelf, knocked its valve askew, and the resulting explosion flattened a motel. Yep, something the size of a Gatorade bottle took out a good-sized building. Having seen the aftermath of a neighbor's misadventure with propane, I'm not too astonished.]
Insider information is that an iPad costs $38 to make in China. Do you really believe an iPhone is that much more costly to make? So there's your cost-to-manufacture, probably no more than $50 even for high-end phones.
I'd say they're so willing to give that up for 2-year contracts because their beancounters say the contract is more profitable than taking the windfall profit from selling the phone outright.